Autocross; so what Mustang is best suited for it?

[shogun32]

EcoBoost with handling package, 3.55 diff maybe the 3.73, 11" wheels, and tremec trans or at least the mt82d5. E85 tune and injectors if needed. big ass intercooler.

Oh, Ford I'm their myopic fascination with front heavy cars didn't make that? Oh well....

Oh wait I just described a Camaro 4cyl 1LE. So buy a Chevy.

Sponsored

 

[Balr14]

My choice would be an old Mustang, the older the better. They are smaller and lighter.

 

[NightmareMoon]

EcoBoost with handling package, 3.55 diff maybe the 3.73, 11" wheels, and tremec trans or at least the mt82d5. E85 tune and injectors if needed. big ass intercooler.

Oh, Ford I'm their myopic fascination with front heavy cars didn't make that? Oh well....

Oh wait I just described a Camaro 4cyl 1LE. So buy a Chevy.

I think the hype around the turbo 4cyl is overblown.

 

[ice445]

In my local chapter it's usually a close race between the guy with the A10 Ecoboost with some handling mods, and the guy with a 2016 GT350. The Camaros usually are on top, but lately someone with a '22 GT PP has been topping the board in CAMC. Really depends more on skill than the car, but I do know that being able to dial in extra negative camber helps a lot.

I suck personally, I'm always too far from the cones and not looking far enough ahead, lol.

 

[shogun32]

I think the hype around the turbo 4cyl is overblown.

Heh, maybe so. But you have to admit they are plenty of fun.

 

[ShadesOfBloo]

Excuse me for asking but, yes I can see that the Mach 1 HP would be faster around the track than a non-HP Mach 1, because of all the HP aero stuff.
But I don’t get why it would be faster than a non-HP Mach 1 on an auto-cross course. If anything, the HP Mach 1 would be a tiny bit heavier and therefore a tiny bit slower for auto-cross courses.

Or is this all about the Cup 2 tires?

If you're comparing stock ones, the Mach 1 HP still has an advantage because of its bigger tires (305 front treads vs. 255) and slightly stiffer springs. If they're modified at all, then it wouldn't matter which Mach 1 you started with.
If they were in the CAM-C class (for example), every S550 in that class is probably using 19x11 wheels and 305 treads (or bigger). They'd also have equal opportunities to remove weight from their cars.

 

[Dana Pants]

18x11 wheels with 295 tires reporting for duty in CamC.

at least the day I purchased wheels, better tire compounds were available in this size.

 

[ShadesOfBloo]

True, to some extent, but there was no magic in the car.

They burned up turbos mostly because they didn't know how to do anti-lag very well and they daily drove it that way. Whatever the budget was, it's less than several CAM-C cars are now. Being a lighter car works in the Camaro's favor, but the longer wheelbase isn't necessarily an advantage. I think the suspension in general is a little better sorted and the electronic differential control makes life a little easier to manage. I heard they had the car below minimum weight and ballasted up to minimum by adding rear weight, which makes sense.

It wasn't about "magic" or the budget, but these were engineers who had a part in getting the 2.0 turbo to production and were better than anyone else at tuning that engine.
The fact that they even wanted an anti-lag system seemed like evidence the engine and turbo were bad match (probably dictated by non-car-guys outside their department).

So, if we compared a Camaro 2.0 1LE and an Ecoboost with similar preparation, I'd rather have the EcoBoost.

 

[ShadesOfBloo]

18x11 wheels with 295 tires reporting for duty in CamC.

at least the day I purchased wheels, better tire compounds were available in this size.

You have 18x11s that fit over the PP1 brakes?

 

[Dana Pants]

You have 18x11s that fit over the PP1 brakes?

Easy peasy. Apex wheels.

 

[ShadesOfBloo]

I have a question and I am hoping for some insight. I am not sure what mustang is best suited for autocross racing?

- The Ecoboost Mustang closer to a 50/50 weight distribution ratio, lighter and is cheap

- The Mustang GT has good performance and more aftermarket support

So, what do you guys think?

When I'm daydreaming about autocross cars and setups, one of the things I look at his "How fast can it go in 2nd gear?" I don't mind shifting in mid-corner once in a while, but there's such a thing as too much.
I've had days when I had to shift up to 3rd gear, and it's only a few seconds before I need 2nd again.
When I'm walking the course and overhear people with 6-speed Miatas, they have to plan out where they'll shift up to 3rd and back to 2nd... They're busier with shifting than I've ever been, or want to be. I like courses where I can shift once (into 2nd) and never worry about the gear again.

My 2020 GT-PP1 is good for about 78mph in 2nd, which covers the vast majority of autocross courses.

The Mach 1, with Tremec, has shorter gear ratios in the transmission. The numbers look favorable for acceleration but then 2nd gear is only good to 70mph. It depends on your local club and site whether you needed 3rd.

A 2015-2017 GT-PP would have to shift to 3rd by 64mph, and I reckon the car is fast enough to make that shift mandatory for most courses. The car would be geared even shorter if you put 305/30R-19s on it.

For a manual EcoBoost, the transmission gears are even shorter. Redline in 2nd gear is at 6500rpm and 63mph, and if you leave it stock-ish, the engine doesn't make power all the way to redline. If you use anything but the default 3.31 rear end, I think you're committing yourself to a lot of shifting.

The V6 making power all the way to redline is definitely a virtue, here.

...Now, if you wanted to tune an EcoBoost to make power all the way to 7500rpm, that solves a lot of these issues.

 

[TeeLew]

For a manual EcoBoost, the transmission gears are even shorter. Redline in 2nd gear is at 6500rpm and 63mph, and if you leave it stock-ish, the engine doesn't make power all the way to redline. If you use anything but the default 3.31 rear end, I think you're committing yourself to a lot of shifting.

The V6 making power all the way to redline is definitely a virtue, here.

...Now, if you wanted to tune an EcoBoost to make power all the way to 7500rpm, that solves a lot of these issues.

For AutoX, this is the biggest issue for an Eco. My 3.55 is too low and means I either ride the limiter or go to third in places. I've got a 3.15 going in because of this. I might be a touch slower for a stop-light grand prix, but I don't care. It's a better gear around town and a much better gear to AutoX.

All the Eco's are A10's now, which kinda sucks. The V6 definitely has an advantage concerning speed in gears, but you have to give up a ton of torque comparitively. Weight is about the same.

 

[NightmareMoon]

Heh, maybe so. But you have to admit they are plenty of fun.

That may be, but I really cant get past the exhaust note

 

[TeeLew]

That may be, but I really cant get past the exhaust note

It's definitely an acquired taste. It sounds a bit like an 1150 Massey-Ferguson once it gets on the pipe. Ya, a bit agricultural, but it's a 4...What can you really do about it?

I've spent a long time working with saucy 4-cylinders, so I'm used to it, but I'd be lying if I told you I wasn't envious of the Coyote scream. Hell, EVERYTHING about the Coyote except the weight is pretty impressive.

 

[kz]

My 2020 GT-PP1 is good for about 78mph in 2nd, which covers the vast majority of autocross courses.

Which is pretty terrible gearing if you have any corners with slower speeds. GT went from one terrible gearing for autocross in 15-17 PPs having 58 mph top speed in 2nd to just as bad having 2nd gear so tall in 18+ that it takes hours to get going if you slow down.

Which is why I run short 315/30R18 tire on 18"x11" wheels which drops gearing very nicely.

Sponsored